Thank you for stopping by and giving some thought to the topic. 

To your described way of political choices. No, it doesn't come close to systemic decision-making, I'm afraid :) 
The systemic consensus is not based on the candidate who, for example, represents a party program that comes closest to your wishes, since you are still "forced" to vote according to your preference. Systemic consensus is not about your preference or the greatest overlap with your preference. The method aims at proposals that represent your least inner resistance. If your ballot paper were a topic, such as some referendums in Switzerland, and if the referendum on the topic did not expect a "yes" or "no" answer from you, but a scaling statement in numbers, then it would be an election on the principle of systemic consensus. 

The method responds to your human need to weigh more than one option, because you could live well with other options. If you choose between ice cream, cake, biscuits or pudding, it often happens that you accept two, three or even four of the suggestions, if not as your favorite food, as an acceptable candy that doesn't make you spit out right away. But it always gives you the chance to reject something completely. There is space between "here I feel zero resistance" and "here I have the greatest resistance". 

For example, what do you do when you decide where you want to live with your family, if you have to move for professional reasons? You don't necessarily decide according to your own selfish preferences, if you could safely assume that the rest of your family would also decide according to their least inner resistance, you would be able to say goodbye to your burning favorite choice as long as the result doesn't reflect your greatest resistance. 

Maybe you try this method on your work when you have difficult group decisions to make? I would be so excited about real results!